This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Hello,
Sorry to disturb you, as I'm sure you have a life outside Wikipedia, but I have a question regarding an image you deleted. The image was Bangor Grammar.jpg and was on the Bangor Grammar School article. I believe that I may have put a misleading summary on the image accidentally. Wikipedia has a lot of rules, and I don't know a lot of them, so the summary was incorrect in terminology. The image that I had uploaded was created by me for the school and is free to use. I just want to know if I'm okay to upload the image again, as in the page titled Your Image that you have, it says that if I reupload the image after changing the license it will be deleted again.
Thanks if you can help, Count Ryan 17:47, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
Excuse me, but why did you delete my entry on Mobilephoria? This was the beginning of a meaningful Wiki entry on a company in the mobile telephone space that is (a) culturally relevant, (b) verifiable, and (c) NOT spam. Wikipedia users depend on Wiki to find out much about a lot of stuff, and your deletions (I checked your deletion log) appear to be arbitrary, judgemental, and culturally narrow--not the premise on which Wikipedia was built.
I understand your predicament as an administrator (so many posts, so little time), but wouldn't it be better for your users to simply edit the offensive material. What was it anyway?
Thank you, --Wikiwallace 21:00, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
P.S. I tried to contest the deletion, but another administrator deleted the contest before I could restore the page and add the reason for contesting it. In the interest of fairness, could you (a) restore the original article text with the {hangon} tag and (b) recover my then-orphaned reason I tried to post to the talk page? Thank you :)
Hi,
My name is Jake Sheridan (From Canada) and I was editing the "Jake Sheridan" entry on wikipedia. I believe that the name "Jake Sheridan" should not be wholly represented on wikipedia by the soccer players "Jake Sheridan" from England. It's unfair to those of us who have the same legal name and who also wish to be represented online in this encyclopedia.
Please let me know what I need to do in order to edit the "Jake Sheridan" page properly.
Thanks,
Jake Sheridan
The real jake sheridan 21:54, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
You wrote:
You can edit any article you like, in any constructive way you like. But you can't add details of yourself to the article of a notable namesake; and you can't alter your notable namesake's article to express your displeasure at the coincidence. It's just basic commonsense, really. ➔ This is REDVEЯS 22:59, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
My response:
I was born in 1972. So therefore the "Jake Sheridan" from England is not my namesake. In fact he was born a full 14 years after me. I'm not displeased with the coincidence that we share the same name, however I do believe because wikipedia is in the public domain that I have just as much right to include the details of my history and biographical data as "Jake Sheridan #2" from England. Instead of arguing with me over details like this please direct me to your supervisor as I wish to pursue further action that doesn't involve you. I look forward to your response. Thanks for your help so far.
The real jake sheridan 05:45, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
My response:
Thanks for your reply. Unfortunately I wouldn't classify myself as a troll or my behaviour as maladaptive. My objective is to find out more about Wikipedia's policies regarding changes that can be made to articles that contain my legal name. I would appreciate any help you could provide but assumed that you were dealing with me in an offhand manner so request to speak with a supervisor or another administrator in order to get clearer answers and possibly some policy documents to read over. Please be direct in your responses rather than covertly aggressive (see your previous post).
The real jake sheridan 22:24, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Why was the breaking point records page deleted, and can you supply with me with the deleted text so i can make it compliant? Johnbpr 12:32, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for the antivandalism at the article Konstantin Tsiolkovsky. Commator 12:59, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
I say! It's good to see you back on wiki Redvers, I myself am going to try to get into the habit of doing some editing each day. I hope all's well and that you will remain as valuable a user as you used to be in the evergrowing fight against vandalism. Your old "friend" -- JiMoThYTALK20:16, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
*whistles innocently before you respond with your sig* Will (talk) 22:54, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
Sorry you felt it necessary to remove the Meols railway totem image after my recent additions. Could it still be put somewhere in the Meols article? (Quite liked it!) Or perhaps on the Meols railway station page? Snowy 1973 13:25, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
By 'Hobby record label' it was intended to convey that the record label was started as a hobby, many successful organisations (Virgin records for instance) were started as a hobby. The label is active, has put out records, and thus one could argue it is notable. Thanks. Johnbpr 14:15, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Suggested code:
<html> <head> <title>Wikibar</title> <style> <!-- .ba { font-size: 1px; background-color:#ddf; } .ic { font-size: 20px; font-weight: bold; font-family: "Arial Narrow", sans-serif; background-color:#ccf; padding-left:2px; } .sf { font-size: 14px; font-weight: bold; font-family: "Arial Narrow", sans-serif; } .ta { font-size: 16px; font-weight: normal; font-family: "Arial Narrow", sans-serif; } --> </style> </head> <body> <table width="175px"> <tr> <td width="175px" colspan="2" class="ic">User pages</td> </tr> <tr> <td width="50px" class="sf">Welcome</td> <td width="125px" class="ta">((subst:Welcome)) ~~~~</td> </tr> <tr> <td width="50px" class="sf">Welcomeg</td> <td width="125px" class="ta">((subst:Welcomeg)) ~~~~</td> </tr> <tr> <td width="175" colspan="2" class="ba"> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="50px" class="sf">Test 1</td> <td width="125px" class="ta">((subst:test)) ~~~~</td> </tr> <tr> <td width="50px" class="sf">Test 2</td> <td width="125px" class="ta">((subst:test2)) ~~~~</td> </tr> <tr> <td width="50px" class="sf">Test 3</td> <td width="125px" class="ta">((subst:test3)) ~~~~</td> </tr> <tr> <td width="50px" class="sf">Test 4</td> <td width="125px" class="ta">((subst:test4)) ~~~~</td> </tr> <tr> <td width="175" colspan="2" class="ba"> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="50px" class="sf">Blank 1</td> <td width="125px" class="ta">((subst:blank1)) ~~~~</td> </tr> <tr> <td width="50px" class="sf">Blank 2</td> <td width="125px" class="ta">((subst:blank2)) ~~~~</td> </tr> <tr> <td width="50px" class="sf">Blank 3</td> <td width="125px" class="ta">((subst:blank3)) ~~~~</td> </tr> <tr> <td width="50px" class="sf">Blank 4</td> <td width="125px" class="ta">((subst:blank4)) ~~~~</td> </tr> <tr> <td width="175" colspan="2" class="ba"> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="50px" class="sf">Spam 1</td> <td width="125px" class="ta">((subst:spam)) ~~~~</td> </tr> <tr> <td width="50px" class="sf">Spam 2</td> <td width="125px" class="ta">((subst:spam2)) ~~~~</td> </tr> <tr> <td width="50px" class="sf">Spam 3</td> <td width="125px" class="ta">((subst:spam3)) ~~~~</td> </tr> <tr> <td width="50px" class="sf">Spam 4</td> <td width="125px" class="ta">((subst:spam4)) ~~~~</td> </tr> <tr> <td width="175" colspan="2" class="ba"> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="50px" class="sf">Attacks</td> <td width="125px" class="ta">((subst:attack)) ~~~~</td> </tr> <tr> <td width="175px" colspan="2" class="ic">Speedy deletes</td> </tr> <tr> <td width="50px" class="sf">Nonsense</td> <td width="125px" class="ta">((db-nonsense))</td> </tr> <tr> <td width="50px" class="sf">Empty</td> <td width="125px" class="ta">((db-empty))</td> </tr> <tr> <td width="50px" class="sf">Vanity</td> <td width="125px" class="ta">((db-bio))</td> </tr> <tr> <td width="50px" class="sf">Attack</td> <td width="125px" class="ta">((db-attack))</td> </tr> <tr> <td width="50px" class="sf">Repost</td> <td width="125px" class="ta">((db-repost))</td> </tr> <tr> <td width="50px" class="sf">Other</td> <td width="125px" class="ta">((db-reason|reason))</td> </tr> <tr> <td width="175px" colspan="2" class="ic">Articles for Deletion</td> </tr> <tr> <td width="50px" class="sf">On page</td> <td width="125px" class="ta">((subst:afd))</td> </tr> <tr> <td width="50px" class="sf">Follow link and add</td> <td width="125px" class="ta">((subst:afd2 | pg=PageName | text=Reason))~~~~</td> </tr> <tr> <td width="50px" class="sf">Then add this to bottom of today's AfD log</td> <td width="125px" class="ta">((subst:afd3 | pg=PageName))</td> </tr> <tr> <td width="175px" colspan="2" class="ic">Proposed deletion</td> </tr> <tr> <td width="50px" class="sf">On page</td> <td width="125px" class="ta">((subst:prod|reason))</td> </tr> <tr> <td width="175px" colspan="2" class="ic">Barnstars</td> </tr> <tr> <td width="50px" class="sf">Original</td> <td width="125px" class="ta">((Barnstar|image=Barnstar.png|text=~~~ awards this Barnstar to '''USERNAME''' for REASON))</td> </tr> <tr> <td width="50px" class="sf">RAOK</td> <td width="125px" class="ta">((Barnstar|image=Raok_barnstar.png|text=~~~ awards this Random Act Of Kindness Barnstar to '''USERNAME''' for REASON))</td> </tr> <td width="175px" colspan="2" class="ic">More</td> <tr> <td width="50px" class="sf">Link</td> <td width="125px" class="ta"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Template_messages">Common templates</a></td> </tr> </table> </body> </html>
Now its more readable and there is a link to the templates page at the bottom of the list. 70.233.156.5 18:15, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
lol. WjBscribe 19:59, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Cheers for blocking that page from being edited for five days, cos everytime I looked at it, there were new superstars every time. Cheers again! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rfcucl1972 (talk • contribs) 20:45, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 3, Issue 38 | 17 September 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 03:36, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Is the new sig better or worse? AngelOfSadness talk 19:20, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
I see you deleted Travis Middle School (Irving, Texas), which had a speedy-delete tag. I had found this article on Special:Newpages and fixed it up somewhat. I wonder whether I should have removed the speedy-delete tag. After I fixed it up, it was still very short but was not lacking in context, in my opinion. Note that the other six middle schools listed at Irving Independent School District have Wikipedia pages. If the page had been left, perhaps interested people would have added content to it. In other words ... perhaps this should have gone to AfD rather than be speedy-deleted? --Coppertwig 21:40, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
... On the other hand, speaking of deleting pages, you might want to have a look at 5 Hour Energy. I'm tempted to put a db-spam tag on it but am not familiar enough with the criteria. --Coppertwig 21:48, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
Ah, sorry about that. I was in the wrong window; I thought I was still on the talk page of the article the user had created. I'll be more careful in future. Best regards, Liquidfinale (Ţ) (Ç) (Ŵ) 20:34, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
I thought I was going to be reverting waterdoor's vandalism all night. I guess he's been blocked now. Either that or it's past his bedtime ;-) Cosmo0 21:13, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
The guy who's been vandalising Theft is back since you blocked him. Can you deal? --Rodhullandemu 21:20, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Kingj123 21:42, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Hello Redvers. About a year ago, you helped me out with my wikaddiction by blocking my account from editing for a year by my request. I thank you for that.
I am contacting you for assistance on another matter now. I wonder if you or another administrator knows how to delete the history of my user page (but not the user talk page). I ask this because in earlier versions of the page, I imprudently included some personal information about my real life identity. I'm not asking for account deletion or anything like that, because I want to continue editing. I just would like to start the user page completely fresh.
Are you able to help with this? Thank you. Rohirok 16:46, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
I noticed you deleted Midtown Connection, and agree with your A7 band deletion. I was wondering if we should also delete the slew of photos and sound files that User:ITecture uploaded to go with the article. It's not clear to me if they meet any speedy criteria, and was wondering if because in my gut I feel the sound files and images will not be useful to other pages, and the purpose of them were to promote a non-notable band, that it would be ok to IARs and delete the images. Or should we just tag them as no-source/no-license and wait 7 days? Your more experienced admin opinion would be appreciated. -Andrew c [talk] 21:58, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
The photos in question were taken by my father in 1938 & 1939. He is now 86 years old and thinks the internet is the lining of a mens bathing suit. How do I secure his permission to use his photos freely. Bobhaybob 9/20/07 Bobhaybob 22:06, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | ||
Redvers, I award you this barnstar for making me chuckle with those little witty comments you leave sometimes when you block someone! Meateater 11:59, 21 September 2007 (UTC) |
Hang on. Thank you for replying to my request about the banana article. The article "report" is not an original piece of research but summarises 12 papers in refereed research journals.I included 3 papers to show the evidence. It has not been copied from somewhere else. I am trying ,in retirement, to make the information available to banana growers and their advisors in poor countries where bananas are a major food source. These people are unlikely to be able to see the original work and I feel they may be able to to read a short summary in Wikipedia. The simple,low cost,technology has been confirmed in USA, China and several other Asian countries.There is little evidence of it being used commercially. A problem I've had with this technology is that it is very cheap and the established banana producers do not want a low cost option to be available.The technology would allow small communities to store bananas when there is oversupply and allow shipment to other countries where a market existed.I am prepared to help people in poor countries adopt the simple technology. I am not sure how to add my contribution and would be grateful of further help.Kevin Joseph Scott 101 19:53, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Is being messed about again. Could you put a temp protection on it? --Rodhullandemu 12:45, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Ceská televize CT1 logo.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 14:05, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed that you recently speedily deleted the pages Bart Has Two Mummies and Little Big Mum because they are unofficial alternate spellings of an official title. Well, the user who created those pages has recreated them, as well as a third (Pokey Mum) and continually removes the speedy templates. Could you please redelete them, and possibly protect the former two, because they have both been deleted twice. Thanks, Scorpion0422 20:30, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
I wonder if you'd reconsider your deletion of this article, or at least userfy it to the bewildered newbie's user pages with a nice message. It seems to have been a Good Faith attempt - and it doesn't look too bad to my eyes, but as a courtesy, I didn't want to undo another admin's deletion. --Dweller 21:39, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
“ | 5-Hour Energy® is a 2-ounce liquid energy shot manufactured by Living Essentials... Living Essentials is marketing 5-Hour Energy with the slogans “Hours of Energy Now – No Crash Later” and “Drink it in Seconds – Feel it in Minutes – Lasts for Hours.”... 5-Hour Energy is available in all U.S. and many Canadian markets with chief classes of trade being drugstore, convenience store, health and nutrition and grocery. It is packaged in a 2-ounce plastic bottle that features a tamper-evident seal and a screw-off cap and sold as single bottles, 2-packs and 6-packs... 5-Hour Energy contains Vitamin B6, Vitamin B12, Niacin (Vitamin B3), Folic Acid (Vitamin B9), Citicoline (an essential nutrient), Glucuronolactone (a naturally occurring chemical compound), Tyrosine (an amino acid), Pheylalanine (an amino acid), Taurine (an organic acid), Malic Acid (a fruit acid), and Caffeine... Notably absent from 5-Hour Energy’s formula is sugar and herbal stimulants. In contrast, a 12-ounce can of a typical energy drink contains 46 grams of sugar... Its advertisements are informative in nature, delineating its differences with canned energy drinks and clearly describing its benefits and features | ” |
I thought I would chime in as a Newbie editor. I wrote this article in good faith as I am a huge fan of energy drinks. I followed all Wiki guidelines that I know about. The article may sound like spam to you but I used countless other energy drink company articles as guidelines. These articles such as, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vault_%28soft_drink%29, have the same type of content that I wrote for the 5 Hour Energy entry. I do apoligize if it came off as blatant advertising or spam, but I used current wiki articles as guidelines. If you were to provide some suggestions I would be more than happy to remove any spam / advertising from the article. All I wanted was to add one of my favorite energy drinks to the list. There are tons already on this list, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_energy_drinks, and I hope to add more.
As per the spam warnings on my home page this has to do with an article I wrote about GSInnovate. After talk with User talk:The Rambling Man I found out that the main reason it was deleted was because I did not have supporting references.
Thank you, Oshburg 20:55, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
The wikipedia rules seem to be endless. I have read as much of them as possible. I think the problem that I keep running into is that I use similar articles to base the ones I write about. For example I used http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vault_%28soft_drink%29 and several other energy drink company articles as a basis for writing the 5 Hour Energy article. For the Glovia article I wrote I used other ERP software companies as a basis for writing the article. The main problem I ran into there was that I did not use any references. I genuinenly want to write good articles; however, the guidelines seem endless and whatever I seem to write ends up being called spam. This is not my intention, I just want to add articles for things I am interested in.
I will edit the article in my user space. What is the procedure from here? Should I notify you once I have edited it?
Thanks for your time Oshburg 17:13, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Ceský Rozhlas logo.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 03:42, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
| ||
Volume 3, Issue 39 | 24 September 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| |||||||||||||
Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST | ||||||||||||
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. R Delivery Bot 02:32, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi there. I see that you have rejected the Kolum sewell article for speedy deletion, saying it doesn't fall under the "Nonsense" category. As the article is about a person the user has made up, as the host of a programme that doesn't exist, it evidently shouldn't be part of Wikipedia. Can I ask what speedy deletion category it should fall under? -- JediLofty User ¦ Talk 15:40, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi there. User:Ketias2 is obviously the same guy who did this last week- the wording of his vandalism is exactly the same. Furthermore, he uses fake annotations to hide his vandalism (Edited #Canada subsection for sentence structure.), and he's sockpuppeting an anon IP. He's clearly not going to stop so I suggest he's just blocked, indefinitely. And again, and again, until he gets the message. --Rodhullandemu 17:45, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
If your going to protect the page against reversion, my I suggest that you do so with my version - for obvious reasons? I ask that you (1) Unprotect the page, (2) Move it so: Morning Post → The Morning Post? Thanks, --Ludvikus 21:37, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
Here's an outside link to a page which has a copy of the paper. If you look carefully at it, you'll be able to see (at the very top) that the paper calls itself:
Accordingly, I ask that you protect the page with "The" preceding "Morning Post." --Ludvikus 21:44, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
"Redirects are cheap"... and utterly useless. Somebody reading the article clicks on the link expecting to see the info on the person and he gets to the same page (because of the loop). What kind of logic is that?
And for your information all those things that link to those redirected articles are because of the loop. They appear to be linked from other pages, but it is just a link for the band from all those pages. Nothing actually links to the very article that is a redirect, except the article in which the information is conatined. So check what are you doing with more detail next time.
If you haven't understood what I am saying then you should take a computer class or go to a neurologist.
And that VANDALISM!!! tag was there for a purpose, and has several meanings. There is no policy which prohibits that, and edit summary's are for the individual to add a description at his own discretion. And do not lover yourself to the J standard of insulting others of being a dick, because you are only making yourself one. Wikipedia:No personal attacks anyone? You could have mentioned it politely and discuss the edits with me than mentioning dicks. Wikipedia:Assume good faith, over and out. Death2 04:46, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
I like being edited, but I think it’s important for every editor to identify him or herself. Any good editor should always be willing, and should often be eager, to discuss any piece of editing. Doing so can often be very valuable for everyone involved. (As it was in this case).
I still believe as strongly as I did before, that it is highly exclusionary to use words that some people might not know, without providing easy access to definitions of those words. (re-read my comments on my user talk page to see more on this topic). Linking to a Wiktionary article, does this just as well as linking to a Wikipedia article, would do this. And I will try to remember how to do this, and will try to do this in the future. What is important, though, is that we link to a definition, wherever that definition may be. If someone who doesn’t know how to link to a Wiktionary article, creates a Wikipedia article, though, then at least this is far better than not linking to a definition at all. And I am strongly opposed to the idea of a “simple-english” Wikipedia, because complex language helps us express complex ideas. A “simple-english anything is condescending. It is saying to a person, “You don’t need complex ideas. Simple ideas will be good enough for you.” It’s just important that we provide definitions whenever necessary. Links can do this well, because then people who do not need definitions, are not slowed in their effort to acquire information, and then people who do need definitions, can get them. I urge you to urge everyone you can, to link to Wiktionary definitions often, and I urge you to show people how to do this often, as you did with me. Creating this link in the article I created was a good way to show me this, and even if I had not learned this skill from this, it still would have helped in the article you edited.
George Pelly-Bosela
p.s. Other people should also be able to see what I have just written to you. So I may also post this letter as an open letter. But I will probably write a new message instead. Just letting you know this is a possibility, though. If you want to forward this letter, or post it as an open letter, to show that your editing was helpful to me, feel free to do so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by GPelly-Bosela (talk • contribs)
beJesus, not becheeses —Preceding unsigned comment added by GPelly-Bosela (talk • contribs)
Why do you feel that “too many links in a sentence are bad for readers and editors alike”? To me each link is an opportunity to gain more information. I’d like an article best, if every word were a link. I don’t have to click on any link if I don’t want to. At some point, for words very few people would click on, making these words links, might not be worth the effort this would take. And this effort might lead to a worse article because the opportunity cost of doing this, might take away from an author’s efforts in other areas. But still, all other things being equal, I always prefer live links. Lots of live links, is one of my favorite things about Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by GPelly-Bosela (talk • contribs)
You told me that, having their work edited, “annoys the becheeses” out of some people. This just made you sound bad. You could just as easily have said that this annoys some people greatly, or annoys some people no end.
The same reasoning, is the primary reason that people should not use the terms, C.E, and B.C.E.. If someone doesn’t want to say “Anno Domini”, or “Before Christ”, then why would that person want to use this date as the turning point of the dating system that he or she uses. And of course many people do not use this date. The terms C.E. and B.C.E., are an attempt to bamboozle people who would not use this date if they thought clearly, into using this date. Nothing that depends on the creation of confusion, or obfuscation, can ever be good. The truth shall set us free, if we are able to see that truth clearly, with minds that are not surrounded by a cloud of haze.
If we care enough to spend the time and energy to talk or write about history, then we will realize that it is an important historical fact that this is the date that so many historians have chosen to use as the turning point in their dating systems. And that it is also an important historical fact that the religious significance of this date, is the reason, that early historians chose this date. The term common era makes it sound as if there was an international conference at which this date was chosen by common assent, as the date at which our world’s history suddenly became much more interconnected than it had been before. And many young people will believe both of these things when they hear this term. You and I may be old enough to be spared these false inferences, because we first learned dates under a more straightforward system. But don’t younger people deserve the same advantages that we had? —Preceding unsigned comment added by GPelly-Bosela (talk • contribs)
You told me that, having their work edited, “Annoys the becheeses” out of some people. This just made you sound bad. You could just as easily have said that this annoys some people greatly, or annoys some people no end.
The same reasoning, is the primary reason that people should not use the terms, C.E, and B.C.E.. If someone doesn’t want to say “Anno Domini”, or “Before Christ”, then why would that person want to use this date as the turning point of the dating system that he or she uses. And of course many people do not use this date. The terms C.E. and B.C.E., are an attempt to bamboozle people who would not use this date if they thought clearly, into using this date. Nothing that depends on the creation of confusion, or obfuscation, can ever be good. The truth shall set us free, if we are able to see that truth clearly, with minds that are not surrounded by a cloud of haze.
If we care enough to spend the time and energy to talk or write about history, then we will realize that it is an important historical fact that this is the date that so many historians have chosen to use as the turning point in their dating systems. And that it is also an important historical fact that the religious significance of this date, is the reason, that early historians chose this date. The term common era makes it sound as if there was an international conference at which this date was chosen by common assent, as the date at which our world’s history suddenly became much more interconnected than it had been before. And many young people will believe both of these things when they hear this term. You and I may be old enough to be spared these false inferences, because we first learned dates under a more straightforward system. But don’t younger people deserve the same advantages that we had?
George Pelly-Bosela —Preceding unsigned comment added by GPelly-Bosela (talk • contribs)
Roger has referred me to you. I created the page for artist Marion Harding and it was deleted - I would like to know why and what can be done to remedy this situation. Pleas inform me of all supporting documentation that you require and it will be sent to you immediately.
Sincerely
Ruan Joshua Harding UserID: Ernstblumberg —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ernstblumberg (talk • contribs)
Well, funnily enough I'm off to Dinant next week for a couple of days, lovely place. A lot nicer than Charleroi (where I've spent about six terrible weeks over the past five or six years). Thanks for the cheese award, can't stand it when people get so hot under the collar! The Rambling Man 21:48, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
I tried to give you some feedback that would help you. Maybe I wanted to return the favor for help that you gave me. I too enjoy deft word play, and it is because I enjoy this, that I am so disappointed by word play that fails to be deft, (even by near misses).
Even if you are a person who doesn’t “Give a fuck”, (as you say you might be), I would be glad that I had assumed that you did, when I wrote to you. Because that is the best way to find out, and because it is the best way to treat people who do give a fuck. Actually the vast majority of us do give a fuck. Sometimes we just prefer to pretend that we don’t. And you have already shown that you do, “Give a fuck” about many similar things. So it’s not much of a stretch to think that you would give a fuck, about clear thinking.
George Pelly-Bosela Wikitalk username - GPelly-Bosela If this username does not show up as a live link, then please show me how to make it do so. Also, would this make my messages read as “signed” —Preceding unsigned comment added by GPelly-Bosela (talk • contribs)
~~~~
at the end. This automagically changes to a link to your user page and the date and time (UTC). You can customise the result by visiting your preferences. And I said nothing about you trolling. ➔ REDVEЯS was here 07:39, 3 October 2007 (UTC)